Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Tories will only reduce public spending to levels seen in the 1990's, not 1930's! Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Back in December a lot was made of the fact that the OBR stated that public spending would be comparable to levels seen in the 1930's and the media jumped on this.. however, this figure actually excludes pensions and welfare which accounts for about ~£160bn in spending or ~20% of total government spending.

    In reality, the OBR figures actually suggest spending levels seen in the 1990's.

    For your added enjoyment, see Clarke ripping Labour apart in PMQ's.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30518446

    ...

    To give us some discussion, do you think spending levels comparable to the 90's are okay or do you believe the roof will fall in.
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Well it's irresponsible to be spending if we don't have the money?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zerforax)
    Well it's irresponsible to be spending if we don't have the money?
    we have no money thanks to labour
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    It's actually 2002 levels. And the most ridiculous thing about this 1930s claim is that it assumes that the British economy has not grown since then. 35% of a far far larger pie will not be dragging us back to the days prior to the welfare state by any means.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gonnagetrejected)
    we have no money thanks to labour
    We seem to have loads of it.

    Lowest borrowing costs for decades.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zerforax)
    Well it's irresponsible to be spending if we don't have the money?
    We do have the money, it's locked up in the bank accounts and property of the obscenely rich.
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MedicineMann)
    We do have the money, it's locked up in the bank accounts and property of the obscenely rich.
    So it's the obscenely rich's money? Unless we're going to turn to communism/socialism and take the money off them.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zerforax)
    So it's the obscenely rich's money? Unless we're going to turn to communism/socialism and take the money off them.
    When the money has been appropriated unfairly it is right to reclaim that money. Money is supposed to be representative of your value to society. People who earn Millions are not a thousand times more useful than someone who works minimum wage so a responsible government should act to address this through tax and redistribution.
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MedicineMann)
    When the money has been appropriated unfairly it is right to reclaim that money. Money is supposed to be representative of your value to society. People who earn Millions are not a thousand times more useful than someone who works minimum wage so a responsible government should act to address this through tax and redistribution.
    Unfortunately you live in a capitalist country so most of the country disagree with you.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zerforax)
    Unfortunately you live in a capitalist country so most of the country disagree with you.
    Most of the UK disagrees with taxation? I don't think you have any evidence of that what so ever.
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MedicineMann)
    Most of the UK disagrees with taxation? I don't think you have any evidence of that what so ever.
    Most of the UK disagrees that earning money means it has been appropriated unfairly.

    People agree with taxation as you need some social welfare, to help the rest in society, not because it's deemed to have been appropriated unfairly.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MedicineMann)
    Money is supposed to be representative of your value to society.
    I thought it was supposed to be representative of purchasing power.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zerforax)
    Most of the UK disagrees that earning money means it has been appropriated unfairly.

    People agree with taxation as you need some social welfare, to help the rest in society, not because it's deemed to have been appropriated unfairly.
    You are conflating two issues. Money should be acquired ethically and if its not the government should act to ensure it is in future. Separately, people should be taxed to an appropriate level, set to ensure that vulnerable people who rely on public support have their needs met.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MedicineMann)
    You are conflating two issues. Money should be acquired ethically and if its not the government should act to ensure it is in future. Separately, people should be taxed to an appropriate level, set to ensure that vulnerable people who rely on public support have their needs met.
    Yes
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gonnagetrejected)
    we have no money thanks to labour
    Or possibly the irresponsible lending of the banks in the US and here and the subsequent selling on of bundles of sub prime investments to unsuspecting companies etc. Have you forgotten already?

    Blaming Labour is like blaming the police for the crimes other people commit.

    Ironically, the Conservatives at the time were complaining about too much regulation not too little.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    1990s levels of public spending resulted in the NHS really struggling and massive waiting lists to access treatment. Something Labour capitalised on in the 1997 election. So cutting spending to those levels seems like a good way to get Labour back in power and the Conservatives back in the wilderness.
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quantex)
    1990s levels of public spending resulted in the NHS really struggling and massive waiting lists to access treatment. Something Labour capitalised on in the 1997 election. So cutting spending to those levels seems like a good way to get Labour back in power and the Conservatives back in the wilderness.
    This is only proportionally. The economy is larger than then and tax revenues have risen proportionally faster than the population. The NHS as it is, is fine. The Tories have managed to cut £20bn internally and transfer it around, even more internal cuts can be made to slow the rise of the NHS budget.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I love Kenneth Clarke. One of the best chancellors this country has ever had.

    (Original post by MedicineMann)
    When the money has been appropriated unfairly it is right to reclaim that money. Money is supposed to be representative of your value to society. People who earn Millions are not a thousand times more useful than someone who works minimum wage so a responsible government should act to address this through tax and redistribution.
    How has the money been appropriated unfairly? And where did the idea that money is supposed to be representative of your value to society come from?
    These people are wealth-creators and the reason they have so much money is because they have made so much money for their business. And they already pay far more in taxation, both nominally and as a proportion of their income, than other people. Increasing taxation any more than the current 45% rate would deal a significant blow to the London financial hub which competes for talented individuals with the likes of Singapore and Dubai who charge far less in tax. Losing these talented individuals would mean less tax revenue and less money being spent on public services.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    This is only proportionally. The economy is larger than then and tax revenues have risen proportionally faster than the population. The NHS as it is, is fine. The Tories have managed to cut £20bn internally and transfer it around, even more internal cuts can be made to slow the rise of the NHS budget.
    I know I'm not sure everything is all rosy in the NHS. Doctors should not be working 78 hour weeks in A&E due to staff shortages (as a junior doctor friend of mine did last week).The slew of negative headlines over the NHS in the last couple of months (GPs, A&E, NHS Choices) are similar to the trolleys in the corridors stories that I can remember from the 90s. Get that into the electorate's mind and connect it with The Conservatives and it will be damaging. I'm surprised that Labour have not made a bigger thing of it. Then again, Miliband and co. do seem to be as about as competent as the average kumquat.
    • Thread Starter
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quantex)
    I know I'm not sure everything is all rosy in the NHS. Doctors should not be working 78 hour weeks in A&E due to staff shortages (as a junior doctor friend of mine did last week).The slew of negative headlines over the NHS in the last couple of months (GPs, A&E, NHS Choices) are similar to the trolleys in the corridors stories that I can remember from the 90s. Get that into the electorate's mind and connect it with The Conservatives and it will be damaging. I'm surprised that Labour have not made a bigger thing of it. Then again, Miliband and co. do seem to be as about as competent as the average kumquat.
    Speaking of A&E that's mainly down to a lack of available nurses rather than doctors, though i accept that's a budget issue that should be addressed. The other failures are not really down to a lack of funds.

    Well there's been some polling done on it and basically they said that people think both Cameron and Miliband are using the NHS for political gain rather than because they genuinely want to support it. Only Labour voters thought Miliband was doing it for good reasons and likewise only Tory voters thought the same about Cameron.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: March 16, 2015
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brexit voters: Do you stand by your vote?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.